URBAN MOBILITY AND INSTITUTIONAL ORGANISATION OF HANOI SEMINAR MASS TRANSIT IN HANOI MONDAY 19 NOVEMBER 2012 JULIEN ALLAIRE TECHNICAL DIRECTOR CODATU
PRESENTATION OUTLINE Part 1: Strategy of Hanoi for urban mobility retrospective 2000-2010: Urban growth in Hanoi Motorbike dominated Development of public transport perspective 2010-2020: Development of public transport Part 2: Public transport and mobility governance Different possibilities for Hanoi International benchmarking The division of tasks between operators and Transport Authority Part 3: Perspectives and conclusions
PART 1: STRATEGY OF HANOI FOR URBAN MOBILITY http://tin180.com/xahoi/phong-su-anh-clip/
HANOI: A CAPITAL CITY WITH A STRONG GROWTH Figure 20: Expansion of Hanoi urban zone in 1983 and 2003 (Source: HAIDEP, 2007; quoted in LEE et al., 2008)
HANOI: A CAPITAL CITY WITH A STRONG GROWTH Economic growth in excess of 10% over the last 10 years. Population growth (see opposite) Territorial expansion (administrative extension) Rapid growth of mobility More motorbikes and cars Therefore: More energy consumption and pollution More congestion More emphasis on accidentology
Share of motorbikes in vehicle fleet (Source: LE Anh Tu, 2006) FROM 2-WHEELER TO 4-WHEELER VEHICLES? Growth in number of vehicles In Hanoi: Motorbikes: + 13%/year Cars: + 21%/year VEHICLE OWNERSHIP IN VIETNAM
MOTORBIKE HEGEMONY IN HANOI Pattern of modal market in Hanoi since rebirth of bus mass transit in 2000 (TRAMOC) Over 600 motorbikes per 1000 inhabitants in Hanoi 80% of households own a motorbike 40% of households own 2 or more Over 80 % of modal share
PLANNING FOR MOBILITY IN HANOI WHAT? 0 % public transport Cities dominated by private transport 100 % active modes Cities dominated by active modes Mixed cities 0 % private transport Cities dominated by public transport Since the early 2000s a commitment to develop collective transportation Modal split: what is the target? 100 % private transport 0 % active modes 100 % public transport From Replogle (1992)
TREMENDOUS EXPANSION OF BUS NETWORK Very strong development of a quality public transport service, accessible for Hanoi dwellers. TRAMOC
TRANSPORT PLANNING TO 2020 Planning goal to the year 2020 (Source: HAIDEP, 2007)
MASS TRANSIT TO 2020
TIME LINE FOR COMMISSIONING OF METRO LINES MOT / Vietnam Railway Administration Metro Rail Transport Project Board (HRB) / CPH MOT / Vietnam Railway Administration MOT / Vietnam Railway Administration Metro Rail Transport Project Board (HRB) / CPH L1 L2 L2a L3 L5
PART 2: PUBLIC TRANSPORT AND MOBILITY GOVERNANCE IN HANOI
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE SCHEME Proposed organization in JICA report Hanoi City VNR Group O&M 1 O&M 2 L1 L2 L2a L3 L5 Need of coordination at the city level to have an integrated network for users D après JICA
SHORT TERM MID TERM LONG TERM THE VARIOUS LEVELS OF RESPONSABILITY STRATEGIC LEVEL Formulation of the policy and targets What do we want to achieve? With what resources? (Territory to be served, level of compensation, level of accessibility, general features of the service Elected representatives TACTICAL LEVEL Characterising the solutions needed to meet the targets: What services need to be developed to achieve these targets? How? Fixing rates, line, mode, time tables, type of service Transport Organising Authority OPERATIONAL LEVEL Develop appropriate means to guarantee delivery How can the services be delivered efficiently? Vehicle management, maintenance, personnel management, consumables, fleet renewal, etc. Operator D après Mezghani (2012)
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE SCHEME AND THE CREATION OF TRANSPORT AUTHORITY Hanoi People s Committee DOT MRB? Tramoc Transerco VNR Group O&M 1 O&M 2 Buses L1 L2 L2a L3 L5 D après JICA
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE SCHEME AND THE CREATION OF TRANSPORT AUTHORITY DOT? Hanoi People s Committee Tramoc + MRB Transerco Buses VNR Group O&M 1 O&M 2 L1 L2 L2a L3 L5
CHARACTERISTICS MASS TRANSIT AUTHORITY Territory involved Legal form: specialised public authority, department of an existing authority, coalition of local governments, company formed by the governments. Partners: share breakdown or composition of board of directors Public involvment Jurisdictions and responsibilities: public transport, mobility or urban development Financial resources : Receipts from ticketing, subsidies, direct taxes, etc. Human resources and expertise Organisation chart: various components, level of management, interrelationship From Naniopoulos et al. (2012)
EXAMPLES OF DIFFERENT FORMS IN EUROPE Region Madrid Valencia Stockholm Amsterdam Lisbon The metropolitan transport authority can take different forms Region Region + local governments Region Barcelona Frankfurt Lyon Paris Berlin Copenhagen Helsinki Several municipalities Municipality Milano London From Naniopoulos et al. (2012)
POTENTIAL BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEMBERS Various possibilities Representatives of municipalities and other local governments: Spain, France, Italy, Portugal, Copenhagen, etc. Representatives of regions and local government: Spain, France, Italy, Holland Government officials (with or without voting right): Barcelona, Madrid, Bologna, Athens Union and chamber of commerce representatives: Madrid, Valencia) Staff representatives: Athens Consumer association representatives: Madrid Representatives of carriers: Madrid, Valencia From Naniopoulos et al. (2012)
FOCAL AREAS Urban development Integration of transport and urban planning Urban mobility policy Traffic and parking Urban logistics Modal integration Overall public transit market Organisation of informal transit Mobility services Taxis Public transport regulation Regulatory framework Identification of network and required services Monitoring public service obligation Contracted out services Technical standards Promotion and information Quality monitoring From Mezghani (2012) 21
BREAKDOWN OF MISSIONS: EXAMPLE OF CITIES IN GERMANY Stakeholders The people Urban transport organising authority Policy committee Transport administration Relations Democracy Hierarchy Strategic level Tactical level Transport policy Social policy Discussion Discussion Discussion Discussion Standard for mobility Standard for accessibility Fixing rates Lines Frequency Type of vehicle Tactical level From Didier Van De Velde Marketing Information Personnel management Vehicle management
BREAKDOWN OF MISSIONS: EXAMPLE OF LONDON, CITIES IN FRANCE, ETC. Stakeholders The people Urban transport organising authority Policy committee Transport administration Transport operators Private or public companies Relations Democracy Hierarchy Contract Strategic level Tactical level Transport policy Social policy Discussion Discussion Discussion Discussion Standard for mobility Standard for accessibility Fixing rates Lines Frequency Type of vehicle Tactical level From Didier Van De Velde Marketing Information Marketing Information Personnel management Vehicle management
BREAKDOWN OF MISSIONS: INCENTIVE THROUGH INVOLVEMENT AT TACTICAL LEVEL Stakeholders The people Urban transport organising authority Policy committee Transport administration Transport operators Private or public companies Relations Democracy Hierarchy Contract Strategic level Transport policy Social policy Discussion Discussion Discussion Discussion Standard for mobility Standard for accessibility Tactical level Tactical level From Didier Van De Velde Min. standards Min. standards Min. standards Min. standards Min. standards Min. standards Fixing rates Lines Frequency Type of vehicle Marketing Information Personnel management Vehicle management
PART 3: PERSPECTIVES AND CONCLUSIONS
CURRENT SPREAD OF JURISDICTIONS? Urban Planning Master Plan (HAUPA) Land Use (DONRE) Development of Roads (Highway Eng. Agency) BRT Metro lines Street management (Municipality) Urban traffic management (DOT) PT Master Plan Rail Master Plan Passenger information, ticketing Management of urban transport (TRAMOC) MRB Cars Motos Taxis Xe-Om Transerco O&M Source: Consia Consulting team Public Transport 26
CHANGE OF JURISDICTIONS? Urban Planning Master Plan (HAUPA) Land Use (DONRE) Development of Roads (Highway Eng.Agency) BRT Metro lines Street management (Municipality Urban Traffic Management (DOT) Coherence PT Master Plan Rail Master Plan Passenger information, ticketing Management Stage of 1 urban transport (TRAMOC) Mgt Urban railways MRB Cars Motos Taxis Xe-Om Bus Operation Transerco Railway O&M op. O&M Source: Consia Consulting team 27
IN THE FUTURE TWO AUTHORITIES? PTA Urban Planning Master Plan (HAUPA) URA Land Use (DONRE) Development of Roads (Highway Eng.Agency) BRT Metro lines Street management (Municipality Urban Traffic Management (DOT) Coherence PT Master Plan Passenger information, ticketing Management of Stage 1 Urban transport (Tramoc) Rail Master Plan Mgt of urban Railways (MRB) Cars Motos Taxis Xe-Om Bus Operation Transerco O&M 23/11/2012 28
IN THE FUTURE ONE AUTHORITY? PTA Urban Planning Master Plan (HAUPA) Land Use (DONRE) Development of Roads (Highway Eng.Agency) BRT Metro lines Street management (Municipality Urban Traffic Management (DOT) Coherence PT Master Plan Passenger information, ticketing Management Stage of 1 Urban transport (TRAMOC) Rail Master Plan Mgt of urban Railways (MRB) Cars Motos Taxis Xe-Om Bus Operation Transerco O&M 23/11/2012 29
CHALLENGE OF ONE AUHTORITY WITH JURISDICTION OVER ALL MODES 4: motorbikes 1: buses 2: taxis 5: cars 3: bicycles 6: pedestrians As many as two thirds of people use a motorbike to go less than 500 m (survey LAM Quang Cuong, 2004)
THE CHALLENGE OF COORDINATION OR INTEGRATION 3 types of integration and three different phases Level of integration Design phase (2010 2015) Implementation phase (2010 2020) Operational phase (after 2020) At the institutional level (regulation) Coordination between the various project owners (Task Force) Public transport organising authority Urban transport organising authority At the systems level (equipment) At the hands-on level (work) - Ticketing technology: pros and cons of the different technologies - Pros and cons of system centralisation/decentralisation?... - Multimodal hub: safe, comfortable transfers - Parking, routing and other services: land reserves?.........
NETWORK: COMPLEMENTARITY OR COMPETITION? Complementarity between modes Competition between modes 5 000 VDN 8 000 VDN 10 000 VDN
MULTI MODAL STATION: COMPLEMENTARITY OR COMPETITION? Intégration du réseau Réseau non intégré
Objectives: CONCLUSIONS Put in place a quality transportation service so that Hanoians prefer mass transit over private transit Simplification of the use of mass transit Economic efficiency The challenge: Integration and/or coordination of policies and initiatives in urban transit At what level: strategic, tactical or operational? Start right now coordination of technical and organisational choices Provide high-level coordination in the work phase Integrate or coordinate at the metro operation level: One company means less coordination effort on the part of the transport organising authority Seamless multimodal transport hubs: Physical integration for transferring from one mode to another Provide for urban development around the stations (land reserves)
THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION! MERCI DE VOTRE ATTENTION! CẢM ƠN BẠN ĐÃ QUAN TÂM CỦA BẠN! JULIEN ALLAIRE JALLAIRE@CODATU.ORG